# Date: 1905–07

TO THE
PAMPHLET
(TWO TACTICS)

to learn to exercise this influence, one must remember that our best ally in enlightening the unconscious workers will be our enemies—the government and the bourgeoisie—and then we shall achieve the result that at the decisive moment the entire working mass will respond to the call of social-democracy! *

*Reference is made to Lenin's article "On a Combat Agreement for Uprising" (Works VII, p. 120).

*TO THE PAMPHLET "TWO TACTICS OF SOCIAL-DEMOCRACY 
IN THE DEMOCRATIC REVOLUTION"
JUNE–JULY 1905. GENEVA.

In the pamphlet "Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution" (Works VIII, p. 442) Lenin wrote: "Thus, for instance, the legal liberal newspaper 'Rassvet' (which we shall try to discuss more thoroughly with the readers of 'Proletariat' some time) often says such 'bold' things about class struggle, about the possible deception of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie, about the workers' movement, about the spontaneity of the proletariat, etc., etc., that an inattentive reader and an undeveloped worker might easily accept its 'social-democracy' at face value. But in reality this is—a bourgeois counterfeit of social-democracy, an opportunist distortion and falsification of the concept of class struggle."

In the archives of the Lenin Institute there are excerpts from Rassvet made in Lenin's own hand. He evidently intended to use them for a 'discussion' with the readers of Proletariat. They are printed below under the letter 'a'. Among the excerpts from Rassvet there is found a small outline of theses used for the "Afterword" to the pamphlet "Two Tactics." The theses are marked with the letter 'ab'. Finally, two notes are appended to this group of documents, which discuss Struve's letter to Jaurès. This letter is mentioned three times in the pamphlet. The notes are printed under the letters 'v' and 'g'.

*At the bottom of Lenin's manuscript, written in pencil: "25 thous[and] lett[ers]; alas!"—Ed.

706 п 784a.

SPECIMENS OF SERVILITY.

Here is how "Rassvet" (8 VI 05) writes about the reception by Nicholas II of a zemstvo delegation.¹

"Thus it has come to pass! Representatives of society—some of whom, priests of their cherished ideals, long and steadfastly subjected to persecution for them, as, for instance, Prince Dm. Iv. Shakhovsky, Petrunkevich, Rodichev, who 2–3 years ago risked exile, were subjected to outrageous and threatening actions—are now received in the Peterhof Palace, speak to a monarch screened off from the zemstvos by bureaucracy about the true sentiment of the mournful country and of his subjects so persistently led astray, speak of that which burned our hearts for so many irretrievable, vainly ruined years, which matured long ago but was ruthlessly mowed down by Petersburg dignitaries, which led us to Port Arthur, Mukden, Tsushima. And with a gentle gaze, with outstretched hand, thanking [them] for the warm feelings that at last led to this necessary and natural intercourse, the sovereign goes to meet the best people of the land²... etc. etc... The ice has melted"³ etc. etc.

|b| idem] (8. VI. 05

A list of persons (by surnames) who empowered the zemstvo delegation. Two hundred surnames are named and "and some others" is added.⁴

Among the 200 are all the well-known zemstvo surnames: Shipov, S. A. Muromtsev, Chelnоkov, Shakhovskys S. I. and D. I., Petrunkevichs I. I. and M. I., Goncharov D. D. (Kaluga), M. I. Tugan-Baranovsky, M. V. Rodzianko, etc., etc.

Rassv[et] "N° 11 'B (or 11 VI).

Article by Ya. Stroyev: on the proletariat and bourgeoisie, bourgeois democracy and so forth, party on the deception of the people, etc.³

Rassvet, 12 VI 05 ("N° 93)... "From 'Kiev[ian] Voices' regarding the Kokovtsev commission.⁶

—"I. Kh. Shvanebakh invited the commission to look at the matter even more simply. The invitation of workers is merely—he pointed out—a little parade, satisfying the petty vanity of the workers' masses."

[b] idem]. "Can we hand over Sakhalin?" III. Article by A. S.

TO THE PAMPHLET
"TWO TACTICS"
153

Very rich island. "No, no! Because of S[ak]h[ali]n one can and ought to bargain!"

[b] idem]. "The Fundamental q[uestio]n of the Workers' Movement." V. Sadova.

"The process of organic growth of the w[orkers'] m[ovement] with us, despite the shattering lessons of the past, is still being distorted, subjected to extreme falsification"—

The barriers of bureaucracy—"in the path toward the natural and unavoidable unification of the w[orking] c[lass]"—are fragile. "But as long as this pr[ocess] of un[ification] and org[aniza]t[ion], meeting obstacles, breaks down into a whole series of separate currents, which, because of their (?) crookedness (?) and abnormality (?) stoke up(!!!) the tense atmosphere of our political life. And the result of the double game with the workers' question by our ruling spheres is evident: on the one hand, anger and bitterness in the w[orking] population, growing with each new phase in the development of the movement; on the other—the absence of an independent workers' party, which would be the expression of the class needs of the proletariat."...

"The actual inequality in every ec[onom]ic dispute between labor and c[apita]l is painfully felt by the proletariat."...

It is characteristic that "the movement just concluded in favor of a 9-h[our] w[orking] d[ay]."

Pet[ersbur]g w[orkers] presented this demand a m[onth] ago. "The state factories and workshops, where a 9-h[our] w[orking] d[ay] had already been established, served as an example." Strikes began.

"A characteristic feature of this movement, as of the workers' movement in Russia in general, was the complete absence of any professional org[aniza]tion. It proceeded without a common guiding plan, without the directing hand of a competent and duly authorized center. Perhaps, given the circumstances, a central organization uniting the workers might not even have deemed it possible to declare a strike, and we would not have been witnesses to unnecessary suffering and sacrifice, the inevitable companions of any ec[onomi]c disorder, any struggle.

"If, on the other hand, the movement had been initiated, it would undoubtedly have proceeded with that discipline and restraint which ch[aracterize] the strike movements of w[orkers] abroad, would have been conducted in a strictly planned and deliberate manner, without outbursts."

...cements its bond with this Russia, exhausted by the blows of fate and the murky period, where tension soon positively reaches the degree of an explosion, if we do not allow age-old ailments to appear before us in all their horror and nakedness."

"The ice has melted. On the threshold of the swiftly reigning new era, each bold stroke of wings lifts higher and higher into the brightened sky, from which life-joyful, awakening Rus' will already be outlined like a flower-pattern carpet."

In the same issue of Rassvet on the 2nd page an article: "Zemstvo and City Figures at the Imperial Majesty." At the end of the article it is said: "The Moscow delegation was empowered to proceed to the capital and the following persons were to speak" (below follows a list of these persons). The delegation in Peterhof on June 19 (6) consisted of: P. A. Heyden, G. E. Lvov, N. N. Lvov, I. I. Petrunkevich, F. A. Golovin, P. D. Dolgorukov, N. N. Kovalevsky, Yu. A. Novosiltsev, F. I. Rodichev, D. I. Shakhovsky, S. N. Trubetskoy, N. L. Korf, A. N. Nikitin, M. P. Fedorov.

⁶"Rassvet" "N° 92 of June 24 (11), 1905; article "Historical Moment" signed: N. Stroyev.

In No. 93 of Rassvet of June 25 (12), 1902 [sic] in the section "Our Press," excerpts from "Kiev Voices."

B.
*THESES FOR THE SECOND CHAPTER OF THE "AFTERWORD" TO THE PAMPHLET 
"TWO TACTICS."

1) Shipov's system (rights and limited zemstvo) or constitutionalism?
2) Limited or universal and equal suffrage?
3) Revolution or compromise?
4) Revolution without the dictatorship of the proletariat and peasantry or dictatorship of these classes in the democratic revolution?

In the pamphlet "Two Tactics of Social-Democracy in the Democratic Revolution," Lenin three times stops at Struve's letter to Jaurès (see Works Vol. VIII, pp. 42, 37, 117). This letter was published in L'Humanité of June 8, 1905, and published in Russian in No. 72 of Liberation of June 2/8 signed by P. Struve. The remarks of Lenin printed below regarding Struve's letter are most fully used in the "Afterword" to the aforementioned pamphlet (ibid., p. 117 and note 48, pp. 119–120).

V.
*NOTE ON "FRANKFURTER ZEITUNG" OF JUNE 9.

Fr[ankfur]t[er] Zei[tu]ng Abendbl[att], 9 VI 05 (Friday).

Edit[orial] note in Tagesrundschau* on the peaceful negotiations between Japan and Russia.

Reference to a l[ette]r fr[om] P. S[truve] to Jaurès in L'Humanité.

S[truve] is called "der Führer der russischen Konstitutionalisten" [the leader of the Russian constitutionalists].**

G. Struve is in favor of an alliance between Russia, Japan and England, through the mediation of France—and in favor of a "strong government" in Russia.

G.
*NOTE ON P. STRUVE'S LETTER TO JAURÈS.

Note that in his l[ette]r to J[aurès] (Hum[anité], 7 VI 05),¹ Mr. S[truve] speaks of the victory of r[evolution] over the government, etc. (as the leader of the p[arty] of constitutional d[emocrats])... And at the same time... N[icholas] II can quite peacefully settle everything: appoint the zemstvos to power.

¹Struve's letter to Jaurès was published in No. 417 of L'Humanité not on June 7, as Lenin incorrectly indicates, but on June 8, 1905, under the heading "La révolution russe et la paix. Lettre ouverte au citoyen Jean Jaurès" ("The Russian Revolution and Peace. An Open Letter to Citizen Jean Jaurès") signed by Pierre Struve.

26730

*LETTER TO K. BRACKE-DERUSSO WITH A REQUEST TO SEND 
THE SPEECH OF P. LAFARGUE ON THE PROVISIONAL 
REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT.

[June 1905. Geneva].

[Mr. Bracke, 197 Bd. Port Royal, M. De rousseau.

Dear comrade!

You told comrade Bielsky that there exists a speech by P. Lafargue on the participation of socialist democracy in the provisional revolutionary government. You would oblige us...

*—in the latest news. Ed.
**—"the leader of the Russian constitutionalists." Ed.